The Sixty-Seventh Book of the Bible

“I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book…” (Revelation 22:18)

As we all know, there are 66 books in the Bible – no more, no less. And yet, from the way that many people interpret the first chapter of Genesis, it appears that they have added a sixty-seventh book to the Bible – a book that guides them in their study of the other 66 books of the Bible.

The name of that sixty-seventh book is the philosophy of naturalism, so-called “science.”

Most pastors – and even entire denominations – now interpret Bible texts in a way to make them compatible with this sixty-seventh book. For example, since this “science” contends that the Earth is billions of years old, Genesis must be reinterpreted to make it “fit” into an old universe. One popular way they do this is the “day-age theory.”

“…and the evening and the morning were the first day.” (Genesis 1:5)

This theory holds that each “day” in Genesis 1 (in Hebrew yom) is a long period of time rather than 24 hours. We have to wonder, though, if these people are unaware that yom appears in the Old Testament with a number attached to it 2,291 times and that it always means a literal 24-hour day. Or do they not know that whenever yom is used in a plural form – as it does 845 times – it means a literal 24-hour day? And are they unaware that whenever yom is modified with “evening and morning” – as it does 38 times outside of Genesis 1 – it always means a 24-hour day?

It’s time for Christians to get back to careful handling of God’s Word. This means we must throw out the sixty-seventh book and that we start taking the Bible for what it says – not reinterpreting it in light of the latest pronouncements of so-called “science.”

Those are our thoughts. What are yours?

Shown in photo: Charles Lyell. His doctrine of uniformitarianism - with its belief in millions and billions of years - had a great influence on Charles Darwin ... and naturalistic scientists of our own day.

Comments

Submitted by Wayne MacKirdy (not verified) on Wed, 2010-11-24 16:02.

To strengthen the case, in Hebrew, Genesis 1:5 uses the phrase "one day" not "first day"

Submitted by mike (not verified) on Tue, 2011-02-01 15:54.

I believe that God created the universe and life. I am a Christian but have one question about creation. How did Adam name all the animals in one day when there was possibly over a million different species? If one counted to a hundred every 60 seconds that would add up to 144,000 in 24 hours. How could he name all the animals of that number in one day? I'm not saying I don't think God could have provided a way. I'm just wondering if you had an answer. Thanks. - Mike

Submitted by stevejs on Tue, 2011-02-01 16:53.

Mike, Adam didn't have to name every species as we now know them. For instance, there was a dog "kind" which later became all the different breeds, not to mention wolves. And he wouldn't have had to give names to tigers, lions, leopards, etc. There was a cat "kind" at the time of creation. So he didn't have to name a million different species. The number was a lot smaller at the time that Adam was given the task of naming the animals. This also explains why there didn't need to be millions of animals on the ark of Noah's time.

Submitted by Rayna Bartley (not verified) on Wed, 2010-11-24 16:42.

I am so so glad you posted the fact that the Bible interprets the days of creation as 24 hours, and you proved it using other Bible references. People are trying to align with naturalists and evolutionists and they are supposed to be believers in the Bible. They are denying the Creator of heaven and earth by their denial of the plain truth of the scripture. I am also glad that your site defends the faith, in these evil days. I truly enjoy your site.

Thank you so much,
Rayna

Submitted by Wayne (not verified) on Thu, 2010-11-25 10:32.

That so many pastors and lay people give the 'sixty seventh' book authority over the Bible tells me that either they are not reading their Bibles or they are like sheep, letting someone else do their thinking for
them, trusting the 'experts' more than their own common sense. But this is the result of years of the teaching of evolution AS A FACT in our schools and universities.

It seems that few people realize that creation is not only a Genesis issue; it is affirmed by the Psalmist, the prophets and the Lord Jesus Himself. They are robbing Him of the glory due Him as the Creator of the marvelous universe,

I depend upon Creation Moments, AIG, The Institute of Creation Research, for relaying the exploding evidence that evolution is FALSE. Keep up the good work!

Wayne Yoder

Submitted by wilfred (not verified) on Thu, 2010-11-25 16:15.

I agree with your comment about the so-called 67th book of the Bible. Americans need to just plain think about the crude ideas about origins being peddled by media, schools, universities, etc. A moment's thought will lead one to realize that Genesis and the rest of the Bible makes much more sense. Keep up your good work, Creation Moments!

Submitted by Jim (not verified) on Sat, 2014-05-24 19:36.

The Bible Doesn't teach that each creative day was 24hrs long or even a thousand years long. Those who hold to that teaching are demonstrating either that they haven't truly considered what they have read in the Bible OR they haven't read it. Here is 'Proof' of that using ONLY the Bible for reference to show that the Creative Days were of indeterminate lengths AND the 7th day, God's Rest, is STILL in process.
Length of Creative Days.
The Bible does not specify the length of each of the creative periods. Yet all six of them have ended, it being said with respect to the sixth day (as in the case of each of the preceding five days): “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.” (Ge 1:31) However, this statement is not made regarding the seventh day, on which God proceeded to rest, indicating that it continued. (Ge 2:1-3) Also, more than 4,000 years after the seventh day, or God’s rest day, commenced, Paul indicated that it was still in progress. At Hebrews 4:1-11 he referred to the earlier words of David (Ps 95:7, 8, 11) and to Genesis 2:2 and urged: “Let us therefore do our utmost to enter into that rest.” By the apostle’s time, the seventh day had been continuing for thousands of years and had not yet ended. The Thousand Year Reign of Jesus Christ, who is Scripturally identified as “Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8), is evidently part of the great sabbath, God’s rest day. (Re 20:1-6) This would indicate the passing of thousands of years from the commencement of God’s rest day to its end. The week of days set forth at Genesis 1:3 to 2:3, the last of which is a sabbath, seems to parallel the week into which the Israelites divided their time, observing a sabbath on the seventh day thereof, in keeping with the divine will. (Ex 20:8-11) And, since the seventh day has been continuing for thousands of years, it may reasonably be concluded that each of the six creative periods, or days, was at least thousands of years in length.
That a day can be longer than 24 hours is indicated by Genesis 2:4, which speaks of ALL the creative periods as one “day.” Also indicative of this is Peter’s inspired observation that “one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.” (2Pe 3:8) Ascribing not just 24 hours but a longer period of time, thousands of years, to each of the creative days better harmonizes with the evidence found in the earth itself.

For a more lengthy, detailed and fully scripturally referenced discussion, read the discourse at the following link - -
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IRppDHCfeTjjIohczBvf7CKJEk-_kzyI5fbQUmn-T00/edit?usp=sharing" title="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IRppDHCfeTjjIohczBvf7CKJEk-_kzyI5fbQUmn-T00/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IRppDHCfeTjjIohczBvf7CKJEk-_kzyI5fbQ...</a>

Submitted by Bev (not verified) on Thu, 2010-11-25 10:02.

Excellent! Thanks for the insight on the word "yom." I'll have to tuck that one away for future use when discussing this issue.

Submitted by Kim Blankinchip (not verified) on Thu, 2010-11-25 20:37.

I often used Creation Moments as part of our Bible study in the lessons for our youth group at church. I will read this to our youth group this Sunday. They will love it as much as I do.

Submitted by Rory Daulton (not verified) on Fri, 2010-11-26 18:21.

You say that when "yom" appears with a number attached to it it always means a literal 24-hour day. There appear to be at least two counterexamples to this.

Hosea 6:2 says, "He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day That we may live before Him" (NASB). This promise of revival does not at all seem to be based on 48 hours. The only defense of a 24-hour day that I have seen is in "Refuting Compromise" by Jonathan Sarfati. He basically says that this kind of non-literalism is common in the Bible and he gives it a name. He seems to think that this confirms literalism here. I don't understand his argument at all--and I admit that I have not looked exhaustively for other commentary on this issue.

On the other hand, I have looked for commentary on Zechariah 14:7: "But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light" (KJV). This seems to clearly be an extended, non-24-hour day. I checked every commentary on Zechariah in a seminary (where every professor I knew was a young-earth creationist). Half the commentaries ignored the length of this day, and the other half all stated that the day is much longer than 24 hours. Again, the only 24-hour commentary on this verse that I have seen is in "Refuting Compromise," and Sarfati's argument is even more incomprehensible here.

My young-earth-creationist pastor made the same claim this article makes. When I showed him these two verses, he changed his mind and agreed that merely "most" of the uses of 'yom' with a day mean 24 hours.

I am undecided on the length of the creation days and am still studying the topic. I would appreciate any comments on these two Bible verses.

Submitted by Paul Bartz (not verified) on Mon, 2010-11-29 13:24.

It would be clearer to say that whenever Scripture uses a number to modify the word "yom" *in a narrative* it always means a 24-hour day. Neither of the counterexamples are narratives, while Genesis 1 clearly is.

Submitted by dominic (not verified) on Tue, 2010-11-30 06:54.

If the writer of Genesis wanted to convey the idea of long ages, he could have used the word “olam”, meaning a long indefinite span of time, instead of “Yom.” He could have expressed the long age similar to how he talked to Abraham about his descendants:

"indeed I will greatly bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on the seashore." Genesis 22:17

He could have said something like: If you can count the stars, that’s how many descendants you will have. If you can count the stars, that is how many days it took me to create. We would have understood that it was a long period of time.

Submitted by Rory Daulton (not verified) on Sun, 2010-12-05 18:37.

Paul Bartz: Thanks for your response. However, in what way is Zechariah 14:7 not a narrative? It is neither poetry nor a conversation. It seems to be a narrative spoken by God rather than written by an editor, but it still seems to be a narrative--a story.

Dominic: I have considered that point before, but it does not seem to be related to my question about these two specific verses that use a number with 'yom.'

Everyone else, especially Stevejs: Are there no other comments that can be made about these two portions of Scripture? I am not being snarky here: I really want to learn more about this aspect of God's holy word.

Submitted by Bill Shope (not verified) on Wed, 2012-07-11 15:12.

The verses you cite are employed when it is debated whether the Day of The Lord is a literal day or a longer period of time. Certainly, the signs in the heavens described by our Lord (Matthew 24), Joel, and John the Revelator indicate possible misuse when attempting to align these verses with conditions in previous dispensations.

Submitted by April (not verified) on Sat, 2010-11-27 12:38.

It's unwise to put "science" as an authority over the Bible. "Science" is really an ignorant scramble for information with garbled and changing interpretations. Men, unless guided by God, are totally lost, no matter how sophisticated their supposed "science."

Submitted by Carol (not verified) on Thu, 2010-12-02 09:12.

My favorite argument to someone who says that the literal 7 days of creation are not true, is that first I ask them how long was a "day" in Genesis. I almost always get the same answer..."I'm not really sure but God says that a day to us is like a thousand years to Him" so then I ask...do you accept as truth when God says I AM the same yesterday, today and forever? Almost always "well yes of course" to which I respond "well if your argument of creation days is true one day equaled a thousand years, and God is not a liar and is the same always, never changing....then how long did Christ hang on the cross? Three thousand years?" To which most have no answer. As Christians, I think that if we try and "break down" the fantastic-ness (not sure it's a real word) of God and try and reason some things out, it is a foothold for Satan to try and confuse. For after all we serve a God that made a guy from dirt, a girl from the guy's rib, snakes walked upright and spoke to the humans all while living in a perfect paradise that was spoken into existence....this seems to be fairy tale made, but remembering always that Satan can not "create" anything but only copies what God creates, the fairy tales of this world can not even compare to our God and this we need to accept as truth without question by faith just as easily as little girls accept that "one day my prince will come", because for those of us who walk in the light, He truly already has. Science is wonderful and I enjoy learning and experimenting, but to me, my Bible is my first truth, all others run a not-so-close second. God says for us to "Seek and ye shall find" but sometimes I think we get busy trying to tunnel our way to China with a spoon and miss the things that are just simply miracles.

Submitted by J.C. (not verified) on Mon, 2010-12-06 17:21.

I think we have to understand that the symbolism of the Bible has its limits. Certainly, the Lord gave us a simple explanation of things that we could grasp, but you cannot stretch this to apply something that goes against his word. There is absolutely no room for "millions" of years in creation. Everything was ready and in place rapidly. All things obeyed the Lord's command and were created specifically each after their own kind, with their seed in themselves.

This is not evolution, but an intentional design. Each thing was individually designed to fulfill its own purpose. The Lord didn't sit around, twiddling his thumbs, hoping that some primordial sludge would eventually evolve. He had a plan and executed it, with each kind of life within its own sphere. We see this in action today. All things reproduce after their own kind.

Evolution is a myth for people who are too lazy to think for themselves and too irresponsible to live in the ways of God.

Submitted by Hilary (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 18:36.

Religion is a myth for people who are too lazy to think for themselves and too irresponsible to live in the ways of science.

Submitted by stevejs on Tue, 2011-02-01 17:03.

You're right, Hillary, all religions are man-made myths. Christianity, however, is not a "religion". It is rooted in the historical person of Jesus. From the things Jesus said and did, Jesus was much more than a mere man. Even atheists and historians say that Jesus was the most important man who ever lived. Actually, it would be much more accurate to say that Darwinism is a myth for people who are too lazy to think for themselves and are willing to believe anything they are told. They've made science into their "god" and worship at the altar of Charles Darwin.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2011-04-04 13:09.

I am so very thankful for Creationmoments.com and Wayne Jackson learned monographs. They keep
me on the straight and narrow pathway God set out for us with logic and facts--nothing but the truth.

Submitted by Patricia (not verified) on Tue, 2012-07-10 10:49.

Well said Stevejs! Compassionate and kind, yet firm in proclaiming the truth!

Submitted by Bob Lovell (not verified) on Tue, 2012-07-10 10:02.

Agree with the previous poster's remark about "religion."

Hilary, nearly all scientific magazines and university classrooms which deal with the subject of origins blithely spew an accidental, pure chance evolutionism as what has to be the explanation, because they so desperately want to avoid the alternative -- intelligent creationism -- which, as a corollary, leads to the conclusion that there is a God who has the right to tell them how to live their lives. They wish to keep humanism on its throne at all costs! "Professing to be wise, they became fools," the Scripture declares.

When you consider that there is more specified complexity in one cell of your little finger than was engineered into the space shuttle, if you cast aside your prejudice against "religion" or God, you can only conclude that there is a Creator. When you look into the vastness of the (known) universe, consider the realm of subatomic particles, some of which we don't even know about yet, in all likelihood, when your cat jumps into your lap and purrs, when you think about how migratory birds are programmed with a GPS system that is accurate to within fractions of a degree, the symbiotic relationships between species, the mimicry practiced by some animals for self-protection, and most of all, the evolutionally unnecessary beauty of the world around you -- how can you reach any other conclusion than the truth of God's existence, His majesty, power and divine nature? "The fool has said in his heart, 'there is no God.' "

No, Hilary, please open your eyes and see the truth. We don't have all the answers because our information is limited and our minds are limited and cannot perceive all the great things of God. But we have plenty of revealed truth, both in Scripture and in the world around us, to know Him through His Son Jesus Christ. Rejection of Him, sadly, leads to an eternity separated from God, which, trust me, you do NOT want to experience.

I will pray for you to find the Truth. Truth in this sense is a person, i.e., Jesus Christ.

** I wrote a Dissertation entitled, "6 Reasons for the 6 Literal Days of Creation. Since the Sun, Moon & Stars (therefore galaxies) were created on the 4th day; the Big Bang Theory blows up in it's own face in light of the order of creation. The Earth was created BEFORE the stars!

God's focus is EARTH, His creatures and creative activity therein. Of course!....God knew man would conjure up the theory of evolution and God's ORDER of creation ~ I believe ~ was designed in such a way to completely dispel the B.B. Theory.

Re: the "Day Age Theory" ~ would it make sense for God to create plant life on the 3rd day and have to miraculously sustain it until photosynthesis came into being when the sun was created the 4th "age"? I also address YOM in the dissertation and God's wisdom in the structure and order of creation is just as genius as creation itself!

Kept This As Brief as Possible (not bad for one who is pleonistic!)

Anchored in Christ, Pastor Mark Rindal
(( 1st recruiter for the Word of Life Bible Institute of NY ~ 80's. The LORD Tripled the enrollment of the institute in a little of 2 years speaking in HS's in 17 states. Praise be to God! ))